Motives for implementing psychosocial risk management were diversified and varied in dependence on the interview partners and enterprises. The legal basis was one reason (among others) for carrying out a risk assessment that was referred to by nearly all interviewed enterprises. In two Spanish cases and one Danish case it had to be enforced emphatically by the works council and (in Spain) by the Labour in-spectorate and the union. In the other enterprises, implementation took place without explicit pressure from outside. Together with normative motives, instrumental and humanist motives also played a part (extended classification following Frick, 2011, p.
980)51. Sector- and country-related patterns were seen in the sample, but these are to be interpreted cautiously and exclusively in the context of the respective enterprises:
• Reactive motives were predominant (e.g. reducing the sickness rate) in the manu-facturing establishments that were examined, while in the service sectors hospital and hotel numerous proactive motives were also referred to as triggers (e.g. im-proving worker satisfaction and image, increasing patient security).
• Normative reasons predominated in two Spanish establishments (at least from the management's point of view), mainly humanist motives were referred to as drivers in the Scandinavian establishments, the British hospital and the Spanish hotel.
If the case studies from Spain are compared as examples with those from Denmark, far-reaching measures were realised – from easy to realise information events and training courses through to more complicated changes (e.g. to work organisation and working hours). In this, the Spanish cases that were illustrated are not behind the Danish cases in the range of the measures, and in some cases go beyond them in part.
With regard to the initial conditions, in the two Spanish cases the limited structures for worker involvement at the commencement of the process are apparent. In both cases, extensive activities were necessary to anchor the inclusion of workers more strongly structurally as well, e.g. through regular department meetings or coordina-tion of the management level with worker representatives on planned operacoordina-tional changes. Structures such as regular team meetings and coordination with worker representatives were already implemented in the Danish case companies.
In contrast, in the Danish case companies, stress inherent to work was in part less questioned. Promotion of the social dialogue and support by managers and col-leagues were made the subject of discussion there in both cases as a solution strat-egy, to offset structural problems (e.g. personnel reductions). At the same time, there was greater focus on social relations and conflicts between workers in the two Dan-ish establDan-ishments, whereas on the worker level in the two SpanDan-ish establDan-ishments they were not seen as a problem area and were therefore not processed.
The results of risk management (assessment of stress and issue of an action plan) were documented in the majority of the establishments. In contrast, a check of effec-tiveness was not carried out either systematically or throughout. Wherever worker
51 Frick differentiates two motives for introducing voluntary OSH systems, (a) relationship-oriented and (b) economic motives, each of which can be pursued in an (c) internal/proactive/seeking, or (d) exter-nal/reactive/avoiding manner. This results in 4 fields that identify different motive situations and are characterised by the following factors: 1) Ethics (a+c), 2) Poor reputation (a+d), 3) Resources (b+c), 4) Costs (b+d).
surveys were carried out regularly they served as expressions of the mood. Follow-up surveys were planned in the Spanish establishments, but had not yet taken place at the time of the survey (case studies). There were no considerations as yet in this respect in the British manufacturing plant. At company level it can be seen what can be observed trans-nationally as well: check of effectiveness is minimised, the more it refers to the actual objectives (i.e. the quality of the realisations of the risk assess-ment) and does not just query facts. Up to now, systematic evaluation and use of the results for internal learning processes is comparatively rare. This is consistent with findings from the GDA survey (2011) in Germany, according to which 51% of estab-lishments in the survey claimed to carry out a (general) risk assessment, but only 16% run through all steps up to "review of effectiveness" (Schmitt & Hammer, 2015, p. 2).
The workplace examples show that it is important for a successful design of the process of risk management to support the both players' preparedness for action and their capacity for action. For this purpose it is necessary to dismantle existing barriers to both knowledge and action.
• With regard to management and senior staff it is necessary to emphasise the ben-efits of risk management– on a normative, but also on an instrumental and human-istic level, whereby the players' currently dominant reference system (normative, instrumental or humanistic motives) is to be taken into account. Assumption of re-sponsibility by management for the health of workers can be supported structural-ly, for example, by concretising it in appropriate guidelines and anchoring it as a management task (e.g. in incentive and assessment systems).
• Good and concrete examples from other establishments and a corresponding ex-change of experience can help to make the way in which psychosocial stress works more understandable and graspable.
• One problem in an examination of psychosocial stress is the focus of company players on individual conditions under which it evolves. Where necessary, such
"reduced" mental models52 on the emergence of stress are to be supplemented by situational factors.
• In addition, specialist expertise and process competence are to be developed, in particular with regard to dealing with participative processes, possible expectation of workers and limits to the changeability of stress. How far stress inherent to work (e.g. emotional stress in dealing with customers or patients) can be changed struc-turally – within limits - (e.g. through breaks and relaxation rooms for staff, as well as through sufficient personnel, functioning and transparent work processes that reduce experiences of frustration for customers, because they can estimate wait-ing times, for example, and can prevent aggression towards workers) can be made clear through good examples from other establishments. Good and concrete examples can also help to make the way in which psychosocial stress works more
52 "Mental models are deeply held internal images of how the world works, images that limit us to fa-miliar ways of thinking and acting. Very often, we are not consciously aware of our mental models or the effects they have on our behavior" (Senge, 1990, p. 8). Mental models determine how information, e.g. cause-and-effect relationships are organised mentally and function as a filter for new information from outside. Referencing Argyris and Schön, Senge differentiates here between espoused theories, which are communicated externally, and theories-in-use, which – on the basis of mental models – influence real action. If real behaviour is to be changed, it is important to make the mental models transparent.
understandable and to break down the complexity and make it processable in workplace practice.
• Sufficient resources and decision-making competence (e.g. transferred by man-agement) are decisive for senior staff in the middle and lower levels, as well as for worker representatives, in order to be able to (co-)design the process.
What is central is that participating players perceive the process as controllable and work conditions as changeable and that players see it as their task to participate in this process, and assume responsibility for this.